>>While acid-fast stain, or enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) procedures will not identify cryptosporidia oocysts to species level, they can be a very effective diagnostic tool when used in conjunction with animals that are symptomatic. As far as misdiagnosis due to prey species carryover of crypto oocyts, this can usually be ruled out by fecal exam on the feeder animals being used, and by the snake exhibiting multiple symptoms of crypto infection.
>>
>>To confirm diagnosis on an asymptomatic carrier, or to confirm other procedures, the PCR – DNA amplification procedure is more informative as it will identify crypto to species level. Additionally, the resolution and lower detection level for oocysts with this procedure is several hundred times that of the other procedures listed above. In one of the previous posts, jhsulliv is correct in that the most logical step is to run an acid-stain, then confirm if necessary by PCR. I have run the carbol-fuchsin acid fast stain procedure many times in the past, and it is fairly straight forward and not overly time consuming. I have never used the PCR procedure, but am familiar with it. It is complicated, time consuming, and more than likely fairly expensive, but is probably the most accurate. The gastric biopsy will confirm as well, but as I stated before, is highly invasive, and obviously more risky than the PCR procedure, especially on smaller snakes.
>>
>>Kelly


Good stuff! I don't disagree at all either.

It's just been my experience, when you start with the simplest tests, that gives you non definitive answers, then it leads to another test, and sometimes another, until the suspected problem is ruled out, or you get to the most accurate test. LOL

The vet I have now is a very competent herp vet, and I agree with him about doing the most accurate testing the first time, when something potentially fatal is suspected. Costly? I've spent a small fortune. Invasive? Sometimes it is at that. LIFE SAVING? Almost always.
-----
Sublime Boa Constrictor

[ Show Entire Thread ]